Elmiko

I'm looking for an opinion on this-it pertains to my '93 BMW 325, not the 928 (thank God!). A month ago, I took it to a well-known BMW shop because it was loosing coolant, and I couldn't find a leak. Turned out to be a cracked head-not shocking on an engine with over 150,000 miles on it. The shop located a used engine with 80,000 miles on it and installed it for $3500 total. I didn't ask about a warranty because it was basically a junkyard engine and I know that used engines always come with a significant risk factor. Anyway, after a few days, the coolant started to disappear again. I finally got it back to the shop a few days ago and they diagnosed a bad head gasket. My wife and son think the shop should absorb the cost. Even though I'm paying the bill, I see it as more of a matter of bad luck this time around. I'm not all that upset-I had great luck when I bought my 928, so everything balances out. The shop owner has assured me he will do his best to minimize the labor charges. I think that's fair. Am I being a chump or just realistic?

ZEUS+

You really should have asked about a warranty, even used parts have them. We put a used 5spd in a 98 frontier 4 months ago. It now has a bad input shaft bearing and the customer will not be billed for the repair. He also did not receive a warranty. In such short time they should work with you.

Jim bailey - 928 International

The shop located ,purchased, and then sold you the used engine. You had every right to expect that it would be servicable usable. The shop should eat it !! Our used engines (all parts) we warranty for one year for replacement or at our option repair.

brutus

i think some of the following applies to this question. reprinted from Wikipiedia [edit] Implied warranty
Main article: implied warranty
An implied warranty is one that arises from the nature of the transaction, and the inherent understanding by the buyer, rather than from the express representations of the seller.

The warranty of merchantability is implied, unless expressly disclaimed by name, or the sale is identified with the phrase "as is" or "with all faults." To be "merchantable", the goods must reasonably conform to an ordinary buyer's expectations, i.e., they are what they say they are. For example, a fruit that looks and smells good but has hidden defects would violate the implied warranty of merchantability if its quality does not meet the standards for such fruit "as passes ordinarily in the trade". In Massachusetts consumer protection law, it is illegal to disclaim this warranty on household goods sold to consumers etc.

The warranty of fitness for a particular purpose is implied when a buyer relies upon the seller to select the goods to fit a specific request. For example, this warranty is violated when a buyer asks a mechanic to provide snow tires and receives tires that are unsafe to use in snow. This implied warranty can also be expressly disclaimed by name, thereby shifting the risk of unfitness back to the buyer.

Another implied warranty is the warranty of title, which implies that the seller of goods has the right to sell them (e.g., they are not stolen, or patent infringements, or already sold to someone else). This theoretically saves a buyer from having to "pay twice" for a product, if it is confiscated by the rightful owner, but only if the seller can be found and makes restitution.

based on that The customer has a right to be sold a good engine after all what point is there of putting in a bad one. You already had one bad one !

brutus

I fail to see the logic of spending $3,500 to fix a 1993 325 which is maybe worth $4,000 retail and only about $2,000 wholesale in good running condition. Your wife and son are correct you should not be spending more money on this car.

Elmiko

Brutus, you're absolutely right-it makes no economic sense. But since I restored the car a few years ago from pretty much a shell, so it has more value to me than an impartial observer. I was able to pass on some of my mechanical knowledge to my son in the hours when we worked on it together, and it was a lot of fun to bring it back from the brink of compaction. You could make the same argument about most 928s. Most of us have put in a lot more time and money into them than their book values could ever justify.

Angel84-928

I think in this case you entrusted the shop to find and install a serviceable unit. They should absorb the cost of R&R'ing the head gasket. It's only been one month.

918-S

Yes, the shop should stand behind the engine. If it's only been a week, the salvage yard should send the shop another engine. Most yards give 30 days at minimum. The yard should also help the shop with the cost of labor. You shouldn't have to pay again.

Rod Underwood

You forget you're talking to folks on the 928 Forum. Using "logic" to make decisions about our cars does not compute. Cars satisfy all kinds of emotional needs,childhood dreams, issues of "want vs. need", and those defy traditional "logic". It scares me to use the word car and logic in the same sentence.

Rod

AO

I could see you paying the cost for the parts, but they should absorb the labor IMHO.